A collection of representative B2B lead discovery scenarios, showing how AI identifies qualified sales opportunities from real-world business conversations.
The Audit Calendar Is Full Until Next Month. Can a Project Launching Its TGE in Ten Days Still Be Accepted?
An audit sales lead weighs a ten-day TGE request against a full calendar, using code freeze, scope, authorization, and retest timing to decide between accept, narrow, and decline.
This is an illustrative scenario designed to explain the product’s judgement logic. It is not a real customer case, testimonial, contract, revenue result, or conversion claim.
01Situation
02Signal judgement
03Confidence vs priority
04Human next step
Signals considered
- The TGE date is fixed
- Audit scope or repository remains unconfirmed
- The project will provide code and a technical contact
This is a simulated composite scenario. Its messages, numbers, deadlines and business circumstances are illustrative and do not represent a real customer, conversation, contract or result.
Maya’s firm is running at capacity. Every smart-contract auditor on the bench is booked through next month — two full reviews of a lending protocol and one exchange integration, each already scheduled with its own fix-and-retest window. Maya is the sales lead, so when the ops coordinator forwards a request that landed in an authorized Telegram group the firm monitors, her first task is not to sell. It is to decide whether the firm can honestly deliver before the date in the message: a TGE in ten days.
TGE stands for token generation event — the moment a project creates and distributes its token. This article is a composite, illustrative scenario: the firm, the lead, the project, the dates, the group, and every message are constructed to show a decision process, not to describe a real customer.
The request, written here as a stand-in for the pattern rather than a quote, reads: “TGE in 10 days. Need audit sign-off before then. Who can take it?” Two other messages sit pinned in the same group: a token contract address and a note reading “code freeze Friday.” Nothing else — no repository link, no scope document, no named decision-maker.
Maya has one decision to make tonight: accept the job, offer a narrowed version, or decline. She cannot make it from goodwill or from the pinned messages alone, because a pinned message creates a claim, not a fact. What she has is a short list of observable signals and a longer list of unknowns.
What the Lead Can Actually Observe
From the group, Maya can observe: a poster who has been active in the channel for weeks, a pinned address that matches the project name in the channel title, a stated TGE date ten days out, and a claim that code freezes on Friday. What she cannot observe from messages alone: whether the repository is really frozen, who wrote the code, whether tests exist, whether the poster is authorized to engage an auditor, and which contracts the project counts as in scope.
The group is one the firm intentionally connected and is authorized to access, and it is exactly the situation where a tool like Top Prospect earns its place — but only as a clean-up layer. Top Prospect processes only the Telegram groups a lead intentionally connects and is authorized to access: it removes duplicates, preserves original messages, sources, and context, and returns classification and priority for human review. It does not read private chats, does not automatically contact group members, and does not certify buying intent or facts. So it gives Maya a deduplicated, source-tagged view of what the project has said — and then her questions do the work.
Her first question is about authorization. The person who posted the request may be a community manager with no right to share the repository or commit the project to a paid engagement. An audit requires read-only code access and deployment details; if the request cannot be tied to a named person who is allowed to provide them, the engagement cannot start lawfully. That question is resolved in a video call, not in the channel.
The Freeze Is a Claim Until the Commit History Says So
A code freeze means no new functional changes after a set date; only fixes for findings from the audit are allowed. The freeze matters because the initial audit — the first full review of the code — produces conclusions that must still be true when the report is published. If code keeps moving during the review, the report describes a contract that no longer exists.
Observable: the pinned note says the freeze is Friday. Unknown: what the repository’s commit history actually shows. Maya’s next step is read-only access plus a look at recent commits. If functional commits appear after the claimed freeze date, the freeze is paper only, and the ten-day window starts slipping on day one.
Scope Decides Whether Ten Days Can Fit
The TGE itself touches a bounded set of contracts: the token contract, and possibly vesting, lockups, or distribution. The group mentions one address. Unknown: whether the project wants only the TGE path audited, or the whole protocol including later features such as staking and governance. Those are very different engagements.
The arithmetic: an initial audit of a single token contract might reasonably occupy four to five working days of an auditor’s time (illustrative numbers, not a quote). Then the project needs a window to fix findings, and the firm needs a retest — a second pass that confirms each finding is resolved — plus time to write and sign the report. Four to five days plus fix time plus retest plus reporting is already most of the ten days, with no slack left for the freeze check and the scope call in front.
So the second decision point is narrow or decline. A narrowed engagement — “we audit the TGE contracts only, the report states that scope explicitly, and later modules are out” — can fit. A project that insists on full-protocol coverage inside the same deadline is asking for a report the firm cannot stand behind, and that is a decline, not a negotiation.
The Countdown From Ten Days Out
One compact timeline shows how little slack exists. All dates are illustrative.
- Day -10: request received; reply asks for read-only repo access, a scope document, and a named, authorized contact; qualification call set for the same day.
- Day -9: commit history checked against the freeze claim; scope confirmed as TGE contracts only; authorization confirmed on the call.
- Day -8: written proposal with the narrowed scope.
- Day -7: initial audit begins.
- Day -5: findings delivered to the project.
- Day -4 and Day -3: project team fixes.
- Day -2: retest of the fixes.
- Day -1: report drafted, reviewed, and signed.
Each row depends on the one before it. If the freeze check fails, if scope is not confirmed, or if fixes take longer than the two-day window, the report date slides past the TGE — which is exactly the outcome the request was trying to avoid.
The Reply That Keeps the Door Honest
The first reply can be short and conditional. A restrained, illustrative version:
“Thanks for reaching out. We can quote a TGE-scope audit if the repository is frozen and we get read-only access and a named contact by end of day. A full protocol review will not fit before your date.”
Nothing in that reply promises a result. It sets the conditions, names what the firm needs to see, and leaves the next move with the project. Maya does not yet know whether the engagement will happen; the reply is a filter, not a sale.
The Decision, Written Down
Maya’s rule after this scenario has three conditions. Accept only when the freeze is confirmed by commit history, the scope is written down and limited to the TGE contracts, and the request is tied to a named person authorized to share code and commit the project. When any condition is missing, the honest options are a narrowed scope or a decline — and a decline is defensible, because a report that does not survive contact with the launch date protects no one.
She sends the qualification request and defers the accept-or-decline call until the morning, when the repo access either arrives or does not. The calendar stays full either way; what changes is which jobs deserve a place on it.